Total Posts:21|Showing Posts:1-21
Jump to topic:

would you risk ot for 16-0?

Lasagna
Posts: 2,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/7/2011 12:01:45 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
It's likely the Steelers will pounce on the 49ers in week 15, clinching the #1 seed for GB. Should they rest the starters and keep their eyes on the prize? It would be catastrophic if GB took key injuries during meaningless games.

At the same time, this is a shot at immortality. A win streak spanning 3 seasons that will go down in history as the greatest run of any team in history. The superbowl will be won by someone else (perhaps) next year, but GB has a chance to transcend the Superbowl and reach heights never before realized.

It's also possible they could lose their edge by sitting players...
Rob
Loserboi
Posts: 1,232
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/7/2011 3:45:55 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/7/2011 12:01:45 AM, Lasagna wrote:
It's likely the Steelers will pounce on the 49ers in week 15, clinching the #1 seed for GB. Should they rest the starters and keep their eyes on the prize? It would be catastrophic if GB took key injuries during meaningless games.

At the same time, this is a shot at immortality. A win streak spanning 3 seasons that will go down in history as the greatest run of any team in history. The superbowl will be won by someone else (perhaps) next year, but GB has a chance to transcend the Superbowl and reach heights never before realized.

It's also possible they could lose their edge by sitting players...

From a business perspective they should go for the 16-0. People will be dying to watch that game. You don't want to give your starters that long of a break anyway in my opinion. They are already going to get a week bye from being 1st seed. Rest too long going to be too rusty from an already ready team.
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/7/2011 10:23:29 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/7/2011 12:01:45 AM, Lasagna wrote:
It's likely the Steelers will pounce on the 49ers in week 15, clinching the #1 seed for GB. Should they rest the starters and keep their eyes on the prize? It would be catastrophic if GB took key injuries during meaningless games.

At the same time, this is a shot at immortality. A win streak spanning 3 seasons that will go down in history as the greatest run of any team in history. The superbowl will be won by someone else (perhaps) next year, but GB has a chance to transcend the Superbowl and reach heights never before realized.

It's also possible they could lose their edge by sitting players...

Immortal? Naw. Someone else will beat their record some day ;) Also by this you mean football history -- the women's basketball team at UConn won 90 basketball games in a row :P Anyway, Rob, you amuse me because you are very dramatic about football lol. I love your enthusiasm though :)

I don't think the Packers should sit their starters. As someone mentioned, that much rest can be negative. Playing gives them time to practice more together, even at the risk of injury (which everyone faces in every game). Regardless, I don't think this is really up for debate as I'm fairly sure the Packers have no intention of doing this. I think it would seem a bit cocky and that's just not their style. I also think people want to give Aaron the opportunity to break Marino's record and stay a candidate for MVP.
President of DDO
Lasagna
Posts: 2,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/7/2011 1:50:42 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/7/2011 3:45:55 AM, Loserboi wrote:
At 12/7/2011 12:01:45 AM, Lasagna wrote:
It's likely the Steelers will pounce on the 49ers in week 15, clinching the #1 seed for GB. Should they rest the starters and keep their eyes on the prize? It would be catastrophic if GB took key injuries during meaningless games.

At the same time, this is a shot at immortality. A win streak spanning 3 seasons that will go down in history as the greatest run of any team in history. The superbowl will be won by someone else (perhaps) next year, but GB has a chance to transcend the Superbowl and reach heights never before realized.

It's also possible they could lose their edge by sitting players...

From a business perspective they should go for the 16-0. People will be dying to watch that game. You don't want to give your starters that long of a break anyway in my opinion. They are already going to get a week bye from being 1st seed. Rest too long going to be too rusty from an already ready team.

When Brees got everyone together for training camp and Rodgers didn't this offseason, people were saying the same thing. Then The Pack came out and scored 21 points against the Saints - in the first quarter (they had TDs in each of the other quarters as well. In Aaron Rodgers' words: "I've just got to ask myself... Could we have started any faster and scored more points tonight?" This Packers' team is battle tested.
Rob
Lasagna
Posts: 2,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/7/2011 3:40:16 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/7/2011 10:23:29 AM, Danielle wrote:
At 12/7/2011 12:01:45 AM, Lasagna wrote:
It's likely the Steelers will pounce on the 49ers in week 15, clinching the #1 seed for GB. Should they rest the starters and keep their eyes on the prize? It would be catastrophic if GB took key injuries during meaningless games.

At the same time, this is a shot at immortality. A win streak spanning 3 seasons that will go down in history as the greatest run of any team in history. The superbowl will be won by someone else (perhaps) next year, but GB has a chance to transcend the Superbowl and reach heights never before realized.

It's also possible they could lose their edge by sitting players...

Immortal? Naw. Someone else will beat their record some day ;) Also by this you mean football history -- the women's basketball team at UConn won 90 basketball games in a row :P Anyway, Rob, you amuse me because you are very dramatic about football lol. I love your enthusiasm though :)

If the Giants were about to win their 19th straight game, and were weeks away from locking down another Superbowl, you'd probably be enthusiastic too. As I understand it, it's not unusual for College teams to be ridiculously dominant.

I don't think the Packers should sit their starters. As someone mentioned, that much rest can be negative. Playing gives them time to practice more together, even at the risk of injury (which everyone faces in every game). Regardless, I don't think this is really up for debate as I'm fairly sure the Packers have no intention of doing this. I think it would seem a bit cocky and that's just not their style. I also think people want to give Aaron the opportunity to break Marino's record and stay a candidate for MVP.

You think McCarthy et al. cares about Rodgers' records? If I were him, I'd do a quick risk analysis: worst-case scenario=injuries.
Rob
BlackVoid
Posts: 9,170
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/7/2011 11:34:01 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
The Packers lost Charles Woodson and Greg Jennings in the super bowl last year and still beat the Steelers. They played a lot of this season without Clay Mathews and still went undefeated. I think they're without their top RB right now and they're still winning. Injuries are never good, but if any team can handle a couple it'd be the Pack.
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/8/2011 10:12:01 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/7/2011 3:40:16 PM, Lasagna wrote:
If the Giants were about to win their 19th straight game, and were weeks away from locking down another Superbowl, you'd probably be enthusiastic too. As I understand it, it's not unusual for College teams to be ridiculously dominant.

Probably not, because you know I don't self-identify with football teams like you do ;)

You think McCarthy et al. cares about Rodgers' records? If I were him, I'd do a quick risk analysis: worst-case scenario=injuries.

Actually yes I do think McCarthy cares about Rodgers' records, but I also think he cares more about what people would say if he decided to do that. Like I said, it seems a bit cocky. I don't think anyone would appreciate it, and there isn't a lot of precedent for it (Brady and co. didn't sit during the Pats undefeated season). If the Packers lost any game (even if they still clinched the #1 seed), or if worst case scenario the starters came back rusty, he would be getting all kinds of criticized for it. Rather, I say he sits the starters in the 2nd half or 4th quarter if they're winning.
President of DDO
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/8/2011 10:18:56 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/7/2011 3:40:16 PM, Lasagna wrote:
At 12/7/2011 10:23:29 AM, Danielle wrote:
At 12/7/2011 12:01:45 AM, Lasagna wrote:
It's likely the Steelers will pounce on the 49ers in week 15, clinching the #1 seed for GB. Should they rest the starters and keep their eyes on the prize? It would be catastrophic if GB took key injuries during meaningless games.

At the same time, this is a shot at immortality. A win streak spanning 3 seasons that will go down in history as the greatest run of any team in history. The superbowl will be won by someone else (perhaps) next year, but GB has a chance to transcend the Superbowl and reach heights never before realized.

It's also possible they could lose their edge by sitting players...

Immortal? Naw. Someone else will beat their record some day ;) Also by this you mean football history -- the women's basketball team at UConn won 90 basketball games in a row :P Anyway, Rob, you amuse me because you are very dramatic about football lol. I love your enthusiasm though :)

If the Giants were about to win their 19th straight game, and were weeks away from locking down another Superbowl, you'd probably be enthusiastic too. As I understand it, it's not unusual for College teams to be ridiculously dominant.

Yes, but even on the NFL level, The Pats went 16 - 0 back in 2007 and that was suppose to be their "immortality," but here we are just 4 years later and it will likely be eclipsed. Immortality doesn't last too long.


I don't think the Packers should sit their starters. As someone mentioned, that much rest can be negative. Playing gives them time to practice more together, even at the risk of injury (which everyone faces in every game). Regardless, I don't think this is really up for debate as I'm fairly sure the Packers have no intention of doing this. I think it would seem a bit cocky and that's just not their style. I also think people want to give Aaron the opportunity to break Marino's record and stay a candidate for MVP.

You think McCarthy et al. cares about Rodgers' records? If I were him, I'd do a quick risk analysis: worst-case scenario=injuries.

Yeah, I think he does. You know the fans do, and if Rogers is 1 TD pass from breaking the record and they don't put him in the final game, fans will be PISSED!!! You don't don't bite the hand that feeds you, Marty.

Also, http://www.debate.org...

Thought you'd like to see.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Grue
Posts: 6
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/8/2011 1:09:46 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Absolutely Green Bay should go for 19-0.

Green Bay already has the first Super Bowl, the most historic stadium, the Trophy named after their coach, and a current Super Bowl title. The last is critical; it is like playing with house money. Fans won't be clamoring for a ring they already have. They'll be cheering for history for the sake of adding the ultimate accomplishment to Green Bay lore.
Lasagna
Posts: 2,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2011 10:36:05 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Well we have our answer. McCarthy is going to be damned if he is going to miss any games. That one preseason loss we sustained is probably still eating him up.

"Their foot is on the accelerator, and they don't want to know what could happen if they release it."

I thought that quote from ESPN summed it up nicely.
Rob
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2011 9:33:43 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/12/2011 10:36:05 AM, Lasagna wrote:
Well we have our answer. McCarthy is going to be damned if he is going to miss any games. That one preseason loss we sustained is probably still eating him up.

"Their foot is on the accelerator, and they don't want to know what could happen if they release it."

I thought that quote from ESPN summed it up nicely.

Then why would they take Rodgers out in the 3rd quarter? Certainly it is to be nice and not run up the score (too much), but that is most definately "taking your foot off the accelerator."
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Lasagna
Posts: 2,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2011 9:50:46 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/13/2011 9:33:43 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 12/12/2011 10:36:05 AM, Lasagna wrote:
Well we have our answer. McCarthy is going to be damned if he is going to miss any games. That one preseason loss we sustained is probably still eating him up.

"Their foot is on the accelerator, and they don't want to know what could happen if they release it."

I thought that quote from ESPN summed it up nicely.

Then why would they take Rodgers out in the 3rd quarter? Certainly it is to be nice and not run up the score (too much), but that is most definately "taking your foot off the accelerator."

There's a big difference. In one scenario, the coach doesn't even let the players suit up because of the fear of injury. In the other scenario, the starters come in and win the game early. I could have quarterbacked the Packers to victory in the third quarter of that game.
Rob
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2011 10:06:19 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/13/2011 9:50:46 AM, Lasagna wrote:
At 12/13/2011 9:33:43 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 12/12/2011 10:36:05 AM, Lasagna wrote:
Well we have our answer. McCarthy is going to be damned if he is going to miss any games. That one preseason loss we sustained is probably still eating him up.

"Their foot is on the accelerator, and they don't want to know what could happen if they release it."

I thought that quote from ESPN summed it up nicely.

Then why would they take Rodgers out in the 3rd quarter? Certainly it is to be nice and not run up the score (too much), but that is most definately "taking your foot off the accelerator."

There's a big difference. In one scenario, the coach doesn't even let the players suit up because of the fear of injury. In the other scenario, the starters come in and win the game early. I could have quarterbacked the Packers to victory in the third quarter of that game.

Yeah, but it is still taking the foot off the accelerator. I will chuckle a little a Rodgers ends up 1 TD short of the record because of stuff like this.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Lasagna
Posts: 2,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2011 3:53:59 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/13/2011 10:06:19 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 12/13/2011 9:50:46 AM, Lasagna wrote:
At 12/13/2011 9:33:43 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 12/12/2011 10:36:05 AM, Lasagna wrote:
Well we have our answer. McCarthy is going to be damned if he is going to miss any games. That one preseason loss we sustained is probably still eating him up.

"Their foot is on the accelerator, and they don't want to know what could happen if they release it."

I thought that quote from ESPN summed it up nicely.

Then why would they take Rodgers out in the 3rd quarter? Certainly it is to be nice and not run up the score (too much), but that is most definately "taking your foot off the accelerator."

There's a big difference. In one scenario, the coach doesn't even let the players suit up because of the fear of injury. In the other scenario, the starters come in and win the game early. I could have quarterbacked the Packers to victory in the third quarter of that game.

Yeah, but it is still taking the foot off the accelerator. I will chuckle a little a Rodgers ends up 1 TD short of the record because of stuff like this.

Rodgers is working on enough simultaneous records that even if he doesn't pass 50 it will still be the best season of a QB ever.
Rob
BlackVoid
Posts: 9,170
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2011 3:55:36 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/13/2011 3:53:59 PM, Lasagna wrote:
At 12/13/2011 10:06:19 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 12/13/2011 9:50:46 AM, Lasagna wrote:
At 12/13/2011 9:33:43 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 12/12/2011 10:36:05 AM, Lasagna wrote:
Well we have our answer. McCarthy is going to be damned if he is going to miss any games. That one preseason loss we sustained is probably still eating him up.

"Their foot is on the accelerator, and they don't want to know what could happen if they release it."

I thought that quote from ESPN summed it up nicely.

Then why would they take Rodgers out in the 3rd quarter? Certainly it is to be nice and not run up the score (too much), but that is most definately "taking your foot off the accelerator."

There's a big difference. In one scenario, the coach doesn't even let the players suit up because of the fear of injury. In the other scenario, the starters come in and win the game early. I could have quarterbacked the Packers to victory in the third quarter of that game.

Yeah, but it is still taking the foot off the accelerator. I will chuckle a little a Rodgers ends up 1 TD short of the record because of stuff like this.

Rodgers is working on enough simultaneous records that even if he doesn't pass 50 it will still be the best season of a QB ever.

So what makes this season better than Brady's 08 season? Right now I'm thinking they're about equal.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2011 3:58:56 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/13/2011 3:53:59 PM, Lasagna wrote:
At 12/13/2011 10:06:19 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 12/13/2011 9:50:46 AM, Lasagna wrote:
At 12/13/2011 9:33:43 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 12/12/2011 10:36:05 AM, Lasagna wrote:
Well we have our answer. McCarthy is going to be damned if he is going to miss any games. That one preseason loss we sustained is probably still eating him up.

"Their foot is on the accelerator, and they don't want to know what could happen if they release it."

I thought that quote from ESPN summed it up nicely.

Then why would they take Rodgers out in the 3rd quarter? Certainly it is to be nice and not run up the score (too much), but that is most definately "taking your foot off the accelerator."

There's a big difference. In one scenario, the coach doesn't even let the players suit up because of the fear of injury. In the other scenario, the starters come in and win the game early. I could have quarterbacked the Packers to victory in the third quarter of that game.

Yeah, but it is still taking the foot off the accelerator. I will chuckle a little a Rodgers ends up 1 TD short of the record because of stuff like this.

Rodgers is working on enough simultaneous records that even if he doesn't pass 50 it will still be the best season of a QB ever.

isn't he only working on 2? The TDs and the passer rating?
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Lasagna
Posts: 2,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2011 5:40:40 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/13/2011 3:58:56 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 12/13/2011 3:53:59 PM, Lasagna wrote:
At 12/13/2011 10:06:19 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 12/13/2011 9:50:46 AM, Lasagna wrote:
At 12/13/2011 9:33:43 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 12/12/2011 10:36:05 AM, Lasagna wrote:
Well we have our answer. McCarthy is going to be damned if he is going to miss any games. That one preseason loss we sustained is probably still eating him up.

"Their foot is on the accelerator, and they don't want to know what could happen if they release it."

I thought that quote from ESPN summed it up nicely.

Then why would they take Rodgers out in the 3rd quarter? Certainly it is to be nice and not run up the score (too much), but that is most definately "taking your foot off the accelerator."

There's a big difference. In one scenario, the coach doesn't even let the players suit up because of the fear of injury. In the other scenario, the starters come in and win the game early. I could have quarterbacked the Packers to victory in the third quarter of that game.

Yeah, but it is still taking the foot off the accelerator. I will chuckle a little a Rodgers ends up 1 TD short of the record because of stuff like this.

Rodgers is working on enough simultaneous records that even if he doesn't pass 50 it will still be the best season of a QB ever.

isn't he only working on 2? The TDs and the passer rating?

Less interceptions, less fumbles, better rushing stats, better completion %, better average yards per play, and most importantly a way better QBR. Rodgers hasn't had a game this year of under a 110 quarterback rating. He should end up with the best single-season QBR ever on top of this streak. He's also on pace to end Brady's 21-game winning-streak (Pack is at 19) and the fact that Brady couldn't finish it off during the Superbowl may prove to be the biggest difference-maker. If Rodgers falls short a bit in terms of TDs and yards, it won't matter, particularly since he's now starting to miss playing time since he's winning games before the fourth quarter.
Rob
Lasagna
Posts: 2,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2011 5:43:46 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Forgot to mention his completion % is slightly better as well. A lot of these will be going to the wire and Rodgers could definitely blow a lot of them with a bad performance in the last couple games - if that's even possible of him anymore.
Rob